[ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency

[Nthelight]

Dash V0.16 Upgrade Status

Seems we have about 1000 masternodes that are slow to upgrade.
Still 500 to be upgraded according to in below link. Not sure how accurate it is.

https://mnowatch.org/legacynodes/
505 nodes listed of which 46 have been spent.
Generated at: Sun 29 Nov 2020 11:22:57 PM UTC.

When I check Dash Ninja it seems it's more like 400ish.









They are all consistenly being PoSE banned, so we will know soon enough if the total count has effectively dropped or not. As far as I can tell, they are almost all being updated after they were PoSE banned.

https://docs.dash.org/en/stable/masternodes/maintenance.html#proof-of-service-bans

[toknormal]

this assumes that all MNOs sell their rewards all the time. That makes the cost real. Otherwise this is all just a virtual number

In the formal (accounting) analysis this is simply not true. Masternodes are being paid. The revenue is real, therefore the cost is real. The currency doesn't change anything. We must therefore investigate WHERE that cost is being taken and by whom. When I did this I discovered it was being drawn from the capital value of the chain because it represents a mining deficiency and mining is what creates real scarcity (i.e. if you define scarcity as commercially competitive effort prevailing to obtain a scarce resource rather than simply a small number of something which I'd label as faux scarcity).

The idea that restricting traffic to order books represents a more valuable form of "scarcity" than mining is even more faux still. I can create my own crypto of 5 coins, never sell them and they won't necessarily be worth anything. But if I can somehow attract competition to extract them from the blockchain at great expense then cost of their extraction puts a commercial value on that scarcity and will set their opening price in the secondary market. (If we define the blockchain itself as the primary market).

I understand you want Dash to switch to a pure PoW coin (as much as possible) and reduce both the MN reward drastically, as well as the share for DCG, but your statement stops there. What comes next? You don't answer that. Do you want Dash to become like Litecoin? You can't be serious about that

Why does anything need to change ?

 • masternodes would still be profitable
 • the treasury would still exist
 • we'd still have all our features
 • we'd still have the same development budget

We'd only be stripping away much of the redundant element of the masternode reward. It isn't paying for anything at the moment so nothing would change in terms of budgets. Nodes would continue to be profitable and in fact be MORE profitable as the marketcap increased. This is what people seem to forget - the reward ratio is irrelevant to masternode profitability because their costs are fixed. So what if they get 10% or 60% ? It all depends on the price, not the reward ratio. (The same is not true for mining). Masternodes could be making $1000 per week at a 20% reward share or $200 per week at a 60% reward share.

On the other hand, reducing mining reward DOES come with a measurable cost. Arguing against this is hypocricy because the basis for the current policy is ostensibly limiting traffic to order books - thereby creating a form of "scarcity", but not one that has any measurable value. It's a notional concept that I personally think is ludicrous because high volume, deep liquidity markets can represent high value assets as well as low value ones. What matters is what's being DONE with the revenue from selling. Spending it on raising mining difficulty is a far more wealth-preserving proposal than giving it away for nothing in this respect and IMO.

In my opinion the treasury is a bigger elephant in the room. That's where I've consistently seen waste.

Again, I find this argument slightly hypocritical. Masternodes are simply an extension of the treasury in economic terms. They're no different from any other commercial contractor and their "delivery" should be evaluated in exactly the same way. If you don't see it that way then you need to see them simply as zero-difficulty miners which is an equally concerning proposition.

So what does Dash get for its $32 million per year from this extended treasury budget ? Hosting costs and an incentive to keep coins in wallets ? But other networks get this for free. Even if those networks do send more of their new supply to markets proportionally (even that's debatable), more of their blockchain goes towards raising fiat to pay for scarcity (REAL scarcity that preserves capital, not faux orderbook traffic management scarcity).

So the $32 million budget per year is a far bigger waste than anything the treasury can throw away IMO. Treasury is only 10% of the supply. Nodes are going to get 60.

[birdonthewire]

So what does Dash get for its $32 million per year from this extended treasury budget ? Hosting costs and an incentive to keep coins in wallets ? But other networks get this for free. Even if those networks do send more of their new supply markets proportionally (even that's debatable), more of their blockchain goes towards raising fiat to pay for scarcity (REAL scarcity that stores capital, not faux orderbook traffic management scarcity).

So the $32 million budget per year is a far bigger waste than anything the treasury can throw away IMO. Treasury is only 10% of the supply. Nodes are going to get 60.

They not only offer hosting costs and coins in wallets ... they also offer services that this network of nodes manages and that enrich the project. The point is that the qualitative leap is the management of the Treasury and that this generates real returns and growth to the project.

I personally believe that both miners and Mnodes get those returns, RELATIVELY ... the problem is that the costs are absolutely unconscionable. And, by the way, the fiat price, which serves to justify an attractive return for Mnodes, you should also consider it for miners, however, there you do claim a higher percentage in the distribution of monetary issues (and for me, there is no a direct transmission of value between mining effort and price).

Imo, both collectives, Mnodes and miners, should receive a much smaller proportion of the monetary issues ... and focus the rest, received by the treasury, on creating more prosperous growth and  price. Starting with an adequate management of Reserves in proven store of values ​​that would represent, without so many subjective speculations, not only a DIRECT transmission of value to the ecosystem but also and by extension, a transmission of this nature to DASH, the attractive store of value. ... and for the general benefit of all the profiles integrated in it. And following a professional management of the DIF, also capable of generating external resources.

I think the rampage of gifted funds up to 2018 had a lot to do with a naive vision both of global expansion at the level of a totally premature adoption and of the conviction, no less childish, that the funds were an endless fountain (there is no more to see the galactic economic extrapolations regarding available funds that RTaylor made at the London'17 event - he, so insistent on highlighting the senseless waste represented by many of the approved proposals -  . The icing on the cake with "The sky is the limit" is simply embarrassing looking back today, and more coming from the visible head of a project, who is supposed to be more rigorous and firm feet on the ground than any fanboy seduced by an exponential fireworks rise).

[toknormal]

They not only offer hosting costs and coins in wallets ... they also offer services that this network of nodes manages and that enrich the project.

I would argue they impoverish the project in the current protocol configuration.

These "services" cost nothing to provide over and above hosting cost. Yet we're charged $32M a year for them and this is paid directly out of the capital value of the chain, just like treasury budgets. Miners at least have to invest hashrate in the chain to get any coin out of it at all. That hashrate adds to the store of capital rather than draining it.

If a treasury contractor wrote a service-provision proposal who's budget accounted for 99% profit margin they'd be likely to get thrown out the door. Saying that the 1% worth of service provision "benefitted the network" would be unlikely to save them.

[jdmcg]

They are all consistenly being PoSE banned, so we will know soon enough if the total count has effectively dropped or not. As far as I can tell, they are almost all being updated after they were PoSE banned.

Looking at https://mnowatch.org/legacynodes/ it seems to me about 300+ have been PoSE banned and have not yet upgraded (either haven't noticed yet or unable for some reason).

Looking at https://www.dashninja.pl/deterministic-masternodes.html it seems about another 2.3% of the current active total count of 4615 (just over 100) will eventually get PoSE banned as well.

We might be sitting around 4500 active masternodes in a week or so which is interestingly enough the same count Dash was at around Feb 2017, right before the bull run...

Oh, and in case you missed it, DASH entered into a technical bull market against the USD on Nov 28... For comparison, DASH last entered a true bull market against the USD on Jan 14 2017... Against BTC it was about Feb 20 2017... right now DASH is above the 50 day SMA, fighting with the 100 day SMA, while the 200 day SMA is around 0.0069 BTC... so very possible DASH enters a technical bull market against BTC end of Dec, beginning of Jan, very much in line with my prediction months ago. Seems there might be something to crypto's (BTC's) 4 year cycle afterall...

[birdonthewire]

They not only offer hosting costs and coins in wallets ... they also offer services that this network of nodes manages and that enrich the project.

I would argue they impoverish the project in the current protocol configuration.

These "services" cost nothing to provide over and above hosting cost. Yet we're charged $32M a year for them and this is paid directly out of the capital value of the chain, just like treasury budgets. Miners at least have to invest hashrate in the chain to get any coin out of it at all. That hashrate adds to the store of capital rather than draining it.

If a treasury contractor wrote a service-provision proposal who's budget accounted for 99% profit margin they'd be likely to get thrown out the door. Saying that the 1% worth of service provision "benefitted the network" would be unlikely to save them.

Okay, I'm not a little persistent about it, I think ...as annoying and even rude as it sounds at times - but the distortion that this generates atrophy the projection of DASH from the root, integral...and I understand that the answer must be frontal, because the DAO hijackers have clearly shown that they are capable of turning one of the great jewels of the ranking into authentic shit ... and enough of that -. But I see it as a question of proportionality, because its contribution of value, in value-added services that are those that DASH has achieved on the original basis of BTC and even shaping its POTENTIAL personality, is undeniable. And furthermore, they are not just economic costs, but governance costs and to the highest degree, where they have openly assumed that they admit a dead end for the project for their own convenience. It's dramatic, but that's the way it is.

For an optimization of the project, a perspective that I miss as an aspiration in DASH for so long .... I think that both should lower their returns in their own currency, DASH. And I say very sincerely that I think they would look better and more solidly paid. But I've seen so much arrogant abuse, stupidity, and lack of vision, that I doubt infinitely it's done from within...let's face it! . Immorality and negligence are acceptable habitats for many active players in the DASH hierarchy. But at odds with exhibiting the project to its fullest potential ... which is what I always looked for in DASH.

For me, DASH still has time to offer an "improved BTC" in the eyes of the entire sector, but obviously, not like that ... with rulers who simply do not want to do it. On the contrary, and as little as it may like, the sector perfectly perceives the underlying manipulation, already inherent to the project, which does not fit into a common perspective of crypto synergy, but rather "classist" / centralized ... and therefore, it is seen as a scam and abuse from the individual perspective of many potential new members who are approaching to value it...in a TOTALLY LOGICAL REACTION.

[toknormal]

But I see it as a question of proportionality, because its contribution of value, in value-added services that are those that DASH has achieved on the original basis of BTC and even shaping its POTENTIAL personality, is undeniable. And furthermore, they are not just economic costs, but governance costs and to the highest degree, where they have openly assumed that they admit a dead end for the project for their own convenience. It's dramatic, but that's the way it is.

If Dash is at $1000, you think it's viable to pay $320 million per year straight out of the blockchain to operate a network of nodes when the service delivery value of those nodes (measured at cost) amounts to barely $1.5 million ?

How does that translate into a "store of value" for a new investor ?

[birdonthewire]

But I see it as a question of proportionality, because its contribution of value, in value-added services that are those that DASH has achieved on the original basis of BTC and even shaping its POTENTIAL personality, is undeniable. And furthermore, they are not just economic costs, but governance costs and to the highest degree, where they have openly assumed that they admit a dead end for the project for their own convenience. It's dramatic, but that's the way it is.

If Dash is at $1000, you think it's viable to pay $320 million per year straight out of the blockchain to operate a network of nodes when the service delivery value of those nodes (measured at cost) amounts to barely $1.5 million ?

How does that translate into a "store of value" for a new investor ?

Obviously not.

I only defend the real added value that the second layer provides, not an aberrant and obvious disproportionality.

A second layer that has become first de facto... unfortunately to screw the project to its liking. By the way, given what he's seen and his ability to guide the project ... it's ridiculous to wait any longer.

[xkcdd]

good for you! I wanted to sell mine at $117 but I said I will wait a few more days to sell at $120 and now its again 85. stupid me.  I will not make the same mistake, next time when it goes to over 110 i'm out of this wreckage

DASH is currently trading at $114 and on it's way to an acceleration pump as pure FOMO sets in 
Please tell me you are out so I can don my moon boots and reflective foil outfit for a victory lap around the moon in a few days time.

[xkcdd]

https://mnowatch.org/legacynodes/ is correct, I had a small bug where a few nodes were a little sticky, but they are unstuck now.  The bottom page summary eg

427 nodes listed of which 47 have been spent.

should be read as such, since the SPORK 21 was thrown, 47 collaterals have been moved, perhaps sold, rebirthed, or simply parked. 427 - 47 = 380 is the list of remaining nodes running on old versions of the DASHD.  Tok, are you nodes still among them?  How's the famine treating ya?  Feeling famished yet? 

[qwizzie]

Bitcoin some $200 away from breaking its ATH.
Interesting times ahead.

Bitcoin price : $19,420
ATH : $19,666

This is how i think things will go :

Whales breakthrough $19,666
Whales establish a blow-off top
Whales start to diversify their Bitcoin profits into Altcoins

Only the 'when' part remains a questionmark to me.

Edit : Bitcoin price just broke its previous ATH, new ATH currently at $19,808
Get ready for some Bitcoin FOMO and Bitcoin hype.
Monthly RSI : 74.42 (signaling a slightly oversold condition)

[birdonthewire]

Bitcoin some $200 away from breaking its ATH.
Interesting times ahead.

Bitcoin price : $19,420
ATH : $19,666

This is how i think things will go :

Whales breakthrough $19,666
Whales establish a blow-off top
Whales start to diversify their Bitcoin profits into Altcoins

Only the 'when' part remains a questionmark to me.

Edit : Bitcoin price just broke its previous ATH, new ATH currently at $19,808
Get ready for some Bitcoin FOMO and Bitcoin hype.
Monthly RSI : 74.42 (signaling a slightly oversold condition)

You have no idea how many inflows of BTC or other speculative capital have accompanied this rise of DASH or what they will do when BTC explodes.

BTC no longer needs the alts to grow,"futurologist" ... that model surpassed him with a Tether that is also about to be unnecessary for his growth. Now it has the Fiat of the big leagues that cheaters like you deny for DASH for creating a centralized scam. But even if he no longer needs them, he can break them with 4 drops of his enormous, more every minute, capital mass ... and generate a de facto standard. Anytime it wants, BTC will do it.

Only by exposing to BTC do you avoid Nakamoto's Cannibalism and protect yourself in the two phases of the speculative Pump & dumps of an increasingly defined standard (from the first phase, the Duffield financing system protected the entire ecosystem ... and even that legacy is already perverted - you don't even know how to create anything worthwhile, you band of corrupt mediocre people, but also, you screw what is well done - ). Meanwhile and after more than ten years of experience in crypto, the miserable Mnodes counting their cheap half coins as misers ... and climbing without ropes.

... and of course at the forefront of "store of value" ...with kindergarten approaches. Whoever was left alone in DASH, was at the right time in the perfect place ... but surrounded by scoundrels ... and he will never forget it, because he will miss the crypto train. Without exposure to BTC, DASH will be as rich as BTC allows it to be, because its growth will not be sustainable or self-sufficient.

And ALL the received wealth of DASH will not be in their hands.

[birdonthewire]

Here for the "rich who need to catch DASH" a paradigmatic post from a scammer between glasses of champagne :


xkcd  16:02
We fucking did it!
Pour yourself a glass of champagne! :champagne_glass:
Bear market over.
From $3250 in March to $19.8k in November, fastest most bullish hero pump ever.
In the space of 3 months Chad SAYLOR double his fortune and his companies, wins CEO of the year award.
DASH .... not quite..... at it's ATH just yet.....
But should be as high as $200 by the time Bitcoin is posting 6 digit valuations.





This charlatan scammer uploads puking doll icons when I expose Discord how to shield AND PROJECT DAO wealth (with the "new extraction", I think i should say "ex-wealth" of the "ex-DAO") with proven Reserves such as BTC and Gold.

Meanwhile, their DASH rewards, he dumps them to BTC ... and keeps sending messages to new victims who fund his scam - if DASH, in the middle of its BTC financing process, is left like a dry skeleton ... it doesn't give a fucking shit ... in fact, you will see it by Discord praying that DASH goes to the bottom, buy with a discount and dump her 30% higher ... condemning her to be a speculative inflatable doll who will fuck in favor of her private interests - .

But he looks at the DAO ...only to take more funds from him if possible, from miners, or blocking Shared Mnodes and a few only ...to pay the DASH name at the price of Gold on the underpants of unknown third world boxers...or , well...directly down the toilet... more fast, bro. And he's showing up around here as a DASH Marine "unmasking trolls" and awarding "Good Dasher" certificates . Really Heroic ... for dummies.

The parasitic hierarchy of DASH is literally teeming with these types of Bitcoin artists. THAT and no other is the reason for not being in the top 10. ABOVE the top 10...because a big part of those bitcoins had to be in DASH Reserves, reinforcing it as a REAL store of value or availables for the expansion of the project ... resources that scoundrels like this will never allow .

AND THOSE are the real enemies of DASH growing... who are inside and deep inside ... not outside.

[robertrodriguez]

good for you! I wanted to sell mine at $117 but I said I will wait a few more days to sell at $120 and now its again 85. stupid me.  I will not make the same mistake, next time when it goes to over 110 i'm out of this wreckage

DASH is currently trading at $114 and on it's way to an acceleration pump as pure FOMO sets in 
Please tell me you are out so I can don my moon boots and reflective foil outfit for a victory lap around the moon in a few days time.

I didn't sell my dash yet...sorry to disappoint you, go fetch me the remote

[Tungi17]

ShopinBit: Pay with Dash - How does it work and what are the benefits?

https://shopinbit.com/en/blog/pay-with-dash-how-does-it-work-and-what-are-the-benefits

Pizza Hut Venezuela Now Accepts Crypto Payments (incl Dash)

https://www.coindesk.com/venezuela-pizza-hut-bitcoin-dash

[Nthelight]

this assumes that all MNOs sell their rewards all the time. That makes the cost real. Otherwise this is all just a virtual number

In the formal (accounting) analysis this is simply not true. Masternodes are being paid. The revenue is real, therefore the cost is real. ...

I understand you want Dash to switch to a pure PoW coin (as much as possible) and reduce both the MN reward drastically, as well as the share for DCG, but your statement stops there. What comes next? You don't answer that. Do you want Dash to become like Litecoin? You can't be serious about that

Why does anything need to change ?

 • masternodes would still be profitable
 • the treasury would still exist
 • we'd still have all our features
 • we'd still have the same development budget

We'd only be stripping away much of the redundant element of the masternode reward. ...

On the other hand, reducing mining reward DOES come with a measurable cost. Arguing against this is hypocricy because the basis for the current policy is ostensibly limiting traffic to order books - thereby creating a form of "scarcity", but not one that has any measurable value. It's a notional concept that I personally think is ludicrous because high volume, deep liquidity markets can represent high value assets as well as low value ones. What matters is what's being DONE with the revenue from selling. Spending it on raising mining difficulty is a far more wealth-preserving proposal than giving it away for nothing in this respect and IMO.

In my opinion the treasury is a bigger elephant in the room. That's where I've consistently seen waste.

Again, I find this argument slightly hypocritical. Masternodes are simply an extension of the treasury in economic terms. ...

So what does Dash get for its $32 million per year from this extended treasury budget ? Hosting costs and an incentive to keep coins in wallets ? But other networks get this for free. Even if those networks do send more of their new supply to markets proportionally (even that's debatable), more of their blockchain goes towards raising fiat to pay for scarcity (REAL scarcity that preserves capital, not faux orderbook traffic management scarcity).

So the $32 million budget per year is a far bigger waste than anything the treasury can throw away IMO. Treasury is only 10% of the supply. Nodes are going to get 60.

They not only offer hosting costs and coins in wallets ... they also offer services that this network of nodes manages and that enrich the project.

I would argue they impoverish the project in the current protocol configuration.

These "services" cost nothing to provide over and above hosting cost. Yet we're charged $32M a year for them and this is paid directly out of the capital value of the chain, just like treasury budgets. Miners at least have to invest hashrate in the chain to get any coin out of it at all. That hashrate adds to the store of capital rather than draining it.

If a treasury contractor wrote a service-provision proposal who's budget accounted for 99% profit margin they'd be likely to get thrown out the door. Saying that the 1% worth of service provision "benefitted the network" would be unlikely to save them.

But I see it as a question of proportionality, because its contribution of value, in value-added services that are those that DASH has achieved on the original basis of BTC and even shaping its POTENTIAL personality, is undeniable. And furthermore, they are not just economic costs, but governance costs and to the highest degree, ...

If Dash is at $1000, you think it's viable to pay $320 million per year straight out of the blockchain to operate a network of nodes when the service delivery value of those nodes (measured at cost) amounts to barely $1.5 million ?

How does that translate into a "store of value" for a new investor ?

Incentivizing full nodes creates an undeniable benefit and prevents us from going in the direction Bitcoin has. Bitcoin decided to limit the block size at 1 MB, because it would become cost prohibitive to run a full node with large blocks and lead to centralization. As if that centralization doesn't happen anyhow, or wasn't already present. Still, it was one of the main arguments and in my opinion ridiculous, as layer 1 can scale far beyond 1 MB without any significant orphan rate. Something to keep in mind. Incentivizing is certainly a good strategy to achieve an objective, but it's possible that we are over incentivizing the Dash MN network.

Anyhow, I hear you and I'm not against the idea of lowering the return for masternode owners. I don't need the return, nor do I do anything with it. I don't run MNs, because of the return. There were no masternodes when I joined Dash. MNs only started end of 2014. I would still run masternodes even if we were to decide to reduce the return to zero. Just like Bitcoiners are running full nodes without any return, simply because they believe strongly in the project. Similarly, I just think it's awesome to be part of the Dash network and run masternodes. Dash masternodes are so awesome and it's going to become so much more than what it is today.

However, I am sure this is not the feeling for everyone. There are probably many people for whom running a MN is all about getting that return, not primarily about supporting the project. This is a consequence of constantly showing the ROI for running a MN. I don't support this, as MNs are not investment vehicles. They really aren't, but some people tried to present it as such or at least made it into a carrot luring in new people. It worked obviously, but over subsidizing the MNs has led to a very large network, but isn't actually required at all, when we look at the actual usage we have. It's like saying we built a super high way with 32 lanes, but don't mention that only 10 cars are driving on it.

It all comes down to this arbitrary setting of the block reward split. Ideally it's the result of a dynamic algorithm, but that's a complex matter. If only we could have someone with a PhD in economics and deep knowledge about money ánd cryptocurrencies take a look at Dash and share his/her opinion on it. Maybe Dash should pay for an independent study on its economics. They could work out which block reward scheme is more likely to lead to a better price per coin (increased perceived store of value) and therefore providing larger returns to all investors due to price appreciation (capital gains).

I would definitely prefer to see Dash at $500 with a 5% MN return than Dash at $100 with a 60% return, but I'm not convinced that your intended block reward split would actually lead to a significant increase in price. I agree though that in your model the overal network cost (in the strict accounting sense ;-) ) would drastically go down obviously.

As I tried to point out in my previous reply, a booming price appreciation depends on so many factors that are non-technical, where Dash needs to improve a lot. There are several non-technical elements that would have a much higher impact on price I suspect. We need much better promotion, which can be done at no cost, simply due to higher involvement and effort from community members to increase excitement and so on. We need to show the world that we are a movement with the ideals of Satoshi in mind, but with massive improvements which benefit end users. Those non-technical factors matter a lot in the crypto wars and much smaller projects than ours are doing better in that regard. Everyone involved should be active on social media spreading the word, but the community is still recovering from a terrible bear market and the "nevorlution" crap, so sentiment is a bit low. It's a bit sad cause we are effectively really close now with Dashpay already running on testnet in preparation for the upcoming public statement. Sentiment will hopefully turn around soon. To be honest, lots of alt projects are deep down in the dumps and suffering too, it's really not just Dash. Bitcoin is kicking everyone's ass. We're perhaps just feeling it more because we used to be a Top10 coin.

So to wrap it up, I have some questions for you:

1/ Why did you never raise your concern about the block reward in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 or 2019? Don't tell me you suddenly had an epiphany in 2020, because anything you say was already true in 2014/2015.

2/ Suppose you are right, what is your ideal proposal in terms of block reward? I remember asking you and you told me something like 90% miners / 5% masternodes / 5% dcg ? Just state it here for the record. Maybe some day we can all look back at it and agree that we were all fools and that you were right.

3/ Also, if you feel so strongly about it, why not use your bloated ;-) masternode return to enter a proposal with your analysis and desired block reward split? At least you could say afterwards that you really tried.

I'll leave it at that, because I'm well aware that this discussion will lead to nothing and detracts all attention away from our upcoming testnet release. I'm really excited about Dashpay. Aren't you?

Anyhow, kudos to you for going against the majority and stating your analysis. I really don't mind, but let's not drag it out endlessly. I don't want it overshadow what is coming.

[Nthelight]

Damn, those bloated masternode returns keeping our ratio down ;-)

[Nthelight]

good for you! I wanted to sell mine at $117 but I said I will wait a few more days to sell at $120 and now its again 85. stupid me.  I will not make the same mistake, next time when it goes to over 110 i'm out of this wreckage

DASH is currently trading at $114 and on it's way to an acceleration pump as pure FOMO sets in 
Please tell me you are out so I can don my moon boots and reflective foil outfit for a victory lap around the moon in a few days time.

I didn't sell my dash yet...sorry to disappoint you, go fetch me the remote

Dash's bull run for 2020/2021 is over. You missed out on the top because you wanted 3 dollah more.

[Nthelight]

Did anyone see Andreas Antonopoulos' tweet about Bitcoin fees?

"If you want cheap and fast transactions use Visa or Paypal."

It's deleted now and he claimed he was being sarcastic.

[qwizzie]

Top 20 Crypto Assets, ranked according marketcap and category



Source :

https://coinmarketcap.com/coins/ (for marketcap)
https://coinmarketcap.com/tokens/ (for marketcap)
https://messari.io (for % Down from ATH)

Date : 1st of December 2020

Previous Top 20 Crypto Assets, ranked according marketcap and category : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg55495441#msg55495441
Date : 1st of November 2020

Dash increased marketcap and decreased (improved) its 'Down from ATH' price percentage

Marketcap                    : From $687,734,681
                                     To     $1,107,124,122

Monthly Change % : 60.98%

Price Down from ATH % : From -95,73%
                                      To     -93,16%    

Monthly Change % : 2,68%

Bitcoin Marketcap Dominance : from 63,6%
                                              to     62,4%

All crypto coins i had data on from previous month have decreased (improved) their Down from ATH %. Which means they are all showing in green on the 'Monthly Change %'.
Some had more price volatility and better price performance, then others. Also according Messari.io, Bitcoin established a slightly higher ATH price of $20,089 three years ago,
then the $19,666 ATH price i saw on Bitstamp (and mentioned in a previous post as been reached and passed).
Link : https://decrypt.co/49459/what-is-bitcoins-actual-all-time-high-price

Next Top 20 Crypto Assets, ranked according marketcap and category overview : 1st of January 2021
Planned Time Interval : Monthly